TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- Defending Afghanistan
Pages (6): « 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 »

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton The invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan have nothing to do with freedom or so-called liberation.

sure, but that doesn't mean that they can't be beneficial by-products.

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton It has everything to do with securing a strategic position in energy supplies.

wrong. afghanistan was about retaliating for 911, pure and simple. afghanistan has nothing the US might want in regards to oil supplies, despite the supposed afghani pipeline that conspiracy theorists always crow about.

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton It's all about Iraq's oil reserves and Afghanistan's position geographically in the region for pipelines.

as above.

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton I'm going off on a tangent, but I also think narcotics are purposefully outlawed so as to maintain the black market status of this sector, and continue the subjugation of the lower classes of society. An otherwise sober lower class would be a threat to any capitalist government which wants to prevent any revolutions. It's a distraction from the world at large.

pure, unadulterated nonsense. were you born 20 years ago you'd be a fully-fledged communist

the reason opium is going nuts is that the US doesn't have the manpower to both hold the country AND control what drug growers are doing. its that simple.

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN sure, but that doesn't mean that they can't be beneficial by-products.

There are no beneficial by-products from having your house blown up by bombs, mortars, bullets, and the likes of war. Last time I checked, there are millions of refugees as direct result of both invasions.

quote:

wrong. afghanistan was about retaliating for 911, pure and simple. afghanistan has nothing the US might want in regards to oil supplies, despite the supposed afghani pipeline that conspiracy theorists always crow about.

Name one Afghani hi-jacker on any of the 9/11 planes. The Taliban had no knowledge there was even a plan to strike America. They were focused on defeating the Northern Alliance.

As for the pipeline, it's not a conspiracy. I suggest you research "CentGas Consortum", "Unical", and the "Trans-Afghanistan Pipeline". In the 1990's, there was intense negociation with who? The Taliban over building a natural gas pipeline through Afghanistan. The US company Unical even helped the Taliban's takeover of Kabul so as to speed up any possible deal with them. But things fell apart, and the deal went nowhere. With the Taliban in power, Unical would not get its favorable terms, niether would CentGas or any other party. So it is my belief in the necessity of the "power that be" to eliminate the Taliban so as to not have to negotiate on their terms an Afghan pipeline.

quote:

pure, unadulterated nonsense. were you born 20 years ago you'd be a fully-fledged communist

LOL...I was born 21 year ago ...I'm a leftie, what can I say? 2-3 years ago though, I was a staunch Bush conservative. The president's fuck-ups changed all that

quote:

the reason opium is going nuts is that the US doesn't have the manpower to both hold the country AND control what drug growers are doing. its that simple.

The Taliban sure did a good job of it. Glad to see we f0cked that up too...

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton There are no beneficial by-products from having your house blown up by bombs, mortars, bullets, and the likes of war. Last time I checked, there are millions of refugees as direct result of both invasions.

lets keep this discussion to afghanistan shall we?

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton Name one Afghani hi-jacker on any of the 9/11 planes. The Taliban had no knowledge there was even a plan to strike America. They were focused on defeating the Northern Alliance.

irrelevant. al qaida's base of operations were in afghanistan, and they were being harboured by the taliban, one of the most oppressive governments in human history. its a no-brainer from where im sitting.

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton As for the pipeline, it's not a conspiracy. I suggest you research "CentGas Consortum", "Unical", and the "Trans-Afghanistan Pipeline". In the 1990's, there was intense negociation with who? The Taliban over building a natural gas pipeline through Afghanistan. The US company Unical even helped the Taliban's takeover of Kabul so as to speed up any possible deal with them. But things fell apart, and the deal went nowhere. With the Taliban in power, Unical would not get its favorable terms, niether would CentGas or any other party. So it is my belief in the necessity of the "power that be" to eliminate the Taliban so as to not have to negotiate on their terms an Afghan pipeline.

i think you put FAR too much stock in this theory. now that the US (more or less) controls afghanistan, where is the fast-tracking of the pipeline? surely, if this was the #1 reason for invasion, then the pipeline would already be in development?

i dont find this argument remotely compelling.

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton LOL...I was born 21 year ago ...I'm a leftie, what can I say? 2-3 years ago though, I was a staunch Bush conservative. The president's fuck-ups changed all that

sorry, i meant active 20 years ago the pipeline for war conspiracy certainly reeks of the old and tired leftist arguments

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton The Taliban sure did a good job of it. Glad to see we f0cked that up too...

right, so youre of the opinion that the rule of law is more important than personal liberty? you will find many countries' blackmarkets come into their own when faced with less painful means of enforcement.

praising the taliban for their stance on opium production is akin to praising hitler for the autobahns or suadi arabia for their lack of alcohol-fuelled violence.

quote:

Originally posted by Magnetonium Whoa, whoa, WHOA. Hold it there. I am in no way blaming the Canadians, dont you try to offend me there, big guy. I love Canada. I just think that our Canadian boys are dying for absolutely NOTHING. Its time for this to end. The recent Afghan jail daring attack easily wiped out any recent Canadian progress in Kandahar. Plus, it happened right under their noses! Maaaan, I almost feel insulted and sort of pissed. We are back at ground zero and Taliban are now attacking Kandahar positions as we speak. --- Seriously, man, what good has the Canadian mission been to Afghanistan anyway? I guess we should look at the rising opium exports from Afghanistan as a positive sign!

You know we're there BECAUSE WE WERE ASKED TO BE THERE...

Maybe you forgot this speech by Afghanistan President Hamid Karzai given at the House of Commons thanking us?

http://pm.gc.ca/eng/media_gallery.a...edia_id=448#tag

Now that the prisoners have escaped,the US has a better excuse to continue the war on terror.It seems like we are running in circles there.

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN lets keep this discussion to afghanistan shall we?

Ahh, but let's get back to your original point. There are by-products from unjustified occupations? That's the logic of your argument.

quote:

irrelevant. al qaida's base of operations were in afghanistan, and they were being harboured by the taliban, one of the most oppressive governments in human history. its a no-brainer from where im sitting.

Firstly, the Taliban did not know 9/11 was going to happen. Secondly, when the Americans demanded for bin Laden, the Taliban rejected the demand because they were not given evidence of his crime. But it does not stop there...

On October 7, 2001, before the onset of military operations, the Taliban made an open offer to try bin Laden in Afghanistan in an Islamic court.[19] This counteroffer was immediately rejected by the U.S. as insufficient. It was not until October 14, 2001, seven days after war had broken out, that the Taliban openly offered to hand bin Laden over to a third country for trial, but only if they were given evidence of bin Laden's involvement in 9/11.[20]

Hmm. Seems like the invasion was a done deal no matter what, huh? Like any government who recieves an extradition request, the Taliban wanted that evidence. If we want to arrest someone in a foreign country, most countries request the evidence. So why did they invade? There was no justifiable reason to. I don't believe one word of propaganda from our governments concerning the justification of a war of aggression.

quote:

i think you put FAR too much stock in this theory. now that the US (more or less) controls afghanistan, where is the fast-tracking of the pipeline? surely, if this was the #1 reason for invasion, then the pipeline would already be in development? i dont find this argument remotely compelling.

How can you build a natural gas pipeline in a war zone? What investor would invest in that? I think that is one of the reasons NATO is sending more soldiers. Otherwise, why fight a war for the Afghans? Tell me? No nation in their right mind would fight a war for a some third world tribal nation half way around the world.

quote:

right, so youre of the opinion that the rule of law is more important than personal liberty? you will find many countries' blackmarkets come into their own when faced with less painful means of enforcement.

Of course not. Which is why we live here in a democracy. Over there, in Afghanistan, it was not a democracy. There was no personal liberty. That's just too bad. But you know, 7 years later, an occupation has failed to win on any strategic level. It kind of goes with the saying, "You can win every battle, but lose the war." Why are we supposedly fighting for the Afghans? What the f0ck have the Afghans done for us? That we have to engage in an ongoing 7 year war against tribal militias. This is why I think it's all bullshit. We don't fight for freedom. For the Afghans or for anyone else. The occupation of Afghanistan is for the best interests of the occupiers, not the Afghans.

I feel sorry Afghanistan was under oppression. But that does not justify an invasion and occupation. The Taliban did not carry out 9/11. They offered to hand over bin Laden, but yet the US refused. Think about it PKC...

quote:

praising the taliban for their stance on opium production is akin to praising hitler for the autobahns or suadi arabia for their lack of alcohol-fuelled violence.

All good things but irrelevant to the overall subject. I don't cancel out bad things from good. Yes they were oppressive, but it is a true statement that the Taliban did an excellent job of eliminating opium cultivation in a place where 75% of the world's herione came from.

-----

The west has ambitions far beyond what they say. Fighting against terrorism, or for freedom, or whatever else they say is pure an simple lies. Repeated to us, over, and over, and over, and over again in across the corporate media. We've been hearing it for 7 years now. Let me tell you what's really going on. Political Islam stands in the way of the Western Alliance's ambitions to dominate the Middle East. It's the age-old East versus West conflict. I am of the opinion we have no right to dominate the Middle East.

quote:

Originally posted by Fir3start3r You know we're there BECAUSE WE WERE ASKED TO BE THERE... Maybe you forgot this speech by Afghanistan President Hamid Karzai given at the House of Commons thanking us? http://pm.gc.ca/eng/media_gallery.a...edia_id=448#tag

He wasnt thanking us,more like begging for more troops and money.

quote:

Originally posted by hardcore trancer He wasnt thanking us,more like begging for more troops and money.

No and Yes.
He did thank us (watch the video).
And yes, he was of course asking us to stay...

quote:

Originally posted by Fir3start3r No and Yes. He did thank us (watch the video). And yes, he was of course asking us to stay...

and sadly his trick worked and Harper extended "the mission".

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton Ahh, but let's get back to your original point. There are by-products from unjustified occupations? That's the logic of your argument.

i dont see it as unjustified.

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton Firstly, the Taliban did not know 9/11 was going to happen.

so?

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton On October 7, 2001, before the onset of military operations, the Taliban made an open offer to try bin Laden in Afghanistan in an Islamic court.[19]

oh yes, i forgot. the taliban, centre for (modern) legal fairness and impartiality!

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton This counteroffer was immediately rejected by the U.S. as insufficient.

as they should have.

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton It was not until October 14, 2001, seven days after war had broken out, that the Taliban openly offered to hand bin Laden over to a third country for trial, but only if they were given evidence of bin Laden's involvement in 9/11.[20]

yeah, so they decided to change their mind once the war began, so what? the calls for "evidence" are a complete smokescreen, would you like me to go searching for all the punishments metered out under the taliban that wouldn't have been satisfied by the evidence?

i cant believe youre falling for their bullshit.

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton Hmm. Seems like the invasion was a done deal no matter what, huh? Like any government who recieves an extradition request, the Taliban wanted that evidence. If we want to arrest someone in a foreign country, most countries request the evidence. So why did they invade? There was no justifiable reason to. I don't believe one word of propaganda from our governments concerning the justification of a war of aggression.

everyone knew osama did it. hell, i knew as soon as the second plane hit the towers. the taliban fucking knew too, you are absolutely kidding yourself if youre arguing they didn't know. they even forced him to lie and say it wasn't him. the taliban knew that al qaida were retreating into the mountains in anticipation of US retaliation, they were retreating because their conscience was clear perhaps?

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton How can you build a natural gas pipeline in a war zone? What investor would invest in that?

ooohhhh, right. so youre saying that not only was the pipeline the #1 reason for the invasion, but it was so damned important that they didn't bother to secure the country before moving onto iraq so that now they can't build their pipeline? seriously, you need to lay off the trancer-x fruit juice. nothing youre saying makes any sense.

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton I think that is one of the reasons NATO is sending more soldiers. Otherwise, why fight a war for the Afghans? Tell me? No nation in their right mind would fight a war for a some third world tribal nation half way around the world.

they're fighting to restore law and order in the country, as well as stamping out terrorist influence. yes, its that simple. otherwise they'd have a controlled military zone in the region of the pipeline.

the only pipe here is the one you're smoking.

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton Of course not. Which is why we live here in a democracy. Over there, in Afghanistan, it was not a democracy. There was no personal liberty. That's just too bad. But you know, 7 years later, an occupation has failed to win on any strategic level. It kind of goes with the saying, "You can win every battle, but lose the war." Why are we supposedly fighting for the Afghans? What the f0ck have the Afghans done for us? That we have to engage in an ongoing 7 year war against tribal militias. This is why I think it's all bullshit. We don't fight for freedom. For the Afghans or for anyone else. The occupation of Afghanistan is for the best interests of the occupiers, not the Afghans.

and what interests are you talking about? you keep banging on about a fictitious pipeline that isn't even in its infancy, do you have any more than that. you ignore the fact that they have been asked to stay by the duly elected government.

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton I feel sorry Afghanistan was under oppression. But that does not justify an invasion and occupation. The Taliban did not carry out 9/11. They offered to hand over bin Laden, but yet the US refused. Think about it PKC...

yeah, everyone would be much happier with the taliban back in charge im sure.

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton All good things but irrelevant to the overall subject. I don't cancel out bad things from good. Yes they were oppressive, but it is a true statement that the Taliban did an excellent job of eliminating opium cultivation in a place where 75% of the world's herione came from.

honestly, i couldnt give a flying fuck about the opium production, so pointing to it as a success story from the taliban administration means nothing to me, and is rather irrelevant to the discussion.

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton Let me tell you what's really going on. Political Islam stands in the way of the Western Alliance's ambitions to dominate the Middle East. It's the age-old East versus West conflict. I am of the opinion we have no right to dominate the Middle East.

simplistic and disingenuous nonsense. just easily-delivered rhetoric devoid of any actual substance.

the neocon agenda is actually concerned with nation-building to a certain extent, and i see no reason to think they don't believe their own rhetoric, however misplaced it might be. they see america as the shining beacon of freedom when compared to the autocratic governments in the region. they wanted to increase american influence in the region, topple hostile dictatorships and hopefully engender democratic change in the region, whilst removing oil control from people like saddam.

whether their goals were wrong or right is immaterial to me, all i do know is that they didn't invade to build a pipeline, and anyone that thinks so really needs to grow the fuck up.

quote:

Originally posted by hardcore trancer Now that the prisoners have escaped,the US has a better excuse to continue the war on terror.It seems like we are running in circles there.

Hehehe..

quote:

Originally posted by hardcore trancer and sadly his trick worked and Harper extended "the mission".

What trick??

Do you really think Canadians are that dumb? Sheesh.

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN i dont see it as unjustified.

So how is a justified?

quote:

so?

What do you mean "so"? If they didn't know, they didn't do it. No justification to invade. HELLO?

quote:

oh yes, i forgot. the taliban, centre for (modern) legal fairness and impartiality! as they should have.

The offer was rejected as it should have been.

quote:

yeah, so they decided to change their mind once the war began, so what? the calls for "evidence" are a complete smokescreen, would you like me to go searching for all the punishments metered out under the taliban that wouldn't have been satisfied by the evidence? i cant believe youre falling for their bullshit.

I never said the Taliban justice system was up to international standards. I see it completely reasonable to ask for bin Laden's extradition!

quote:

everyone knew osama did it. hell, i knew as soon as the second plane hit the towers. the taliban fucking knew too, you are absolutely kidding yourself if youre arguing they didn't know. they even forced him to lie and say it wasn't him. the taliban knew that al qaida were retreating into the mountains in anticipation of US retaliation, they were retreating because their conscience was clear perhaps?

Do you honestly think the Taliban would want to fight the United States military!? Go after Al-Qaida. FINE! Start occupying foreign countries. HELL NO!

quote:

ooohhhh, right. so youre saying that not only was the pipeline the #1 reason for the invasion, but it was so damned important that they didn't bother to secure the country before moving onto iraq so that now they can't build their pipeline? seriously, you need to lay off the trancer-x fruit juice. nothing youre saying makes any sense.

Never said a pipeline was the #1 reason for the invasion. Straw man argument. I said, "It has everything to do with securing a strategic position in energy supplies."

quote:

they're fighting to restore law and order in the country, as well as stamping out terrorist influence. yes, its that simple. otherwise they'd have a controlled military zone in the region of the pipeline. the only pipe here is the one you're smoking.

Fighting to restore law and order? You mean the law & order which was destroyed by NATO? The only terrorists were Al-Qaida. It seems like this War on Terrorism likes to focus on regime-change instead of bringing to justice the REAL terrorists. Deposed the Taliban, deposed Saddam, Osama bin Laden...alive and well 7 years after the 9/11 attacks. Fighting to restore law and order in Afghanistan. That makes me chuckle... Let's fight for law and order in Zimbabwe too. Oh, forgot. No oil! No strategic position like central Asia!

quote:

and what interests are you talking about? you keep banging on about a fictitious pipeline that isn't even in its infancy, do you have any more than that. you ignore the fact that they have been asked to stay by the duly elected government.

Geopolitical interests. Ensuring energy supplies for the Western bloc.
Fictitious pipeline? No. I already gave terms to search by. Stay? Fine. But fight their battles? No.

quote:

yeah, everyone would be much happier with the taliban back in charge im sure.

As I said, we are not here to fight other people's wars.

quote:

simplistic and disingenuous nonsense. just easily-delivered rhetoric devoid of any actual substance.

Oh, and "fighting for freedom" isn't simplistic or rhetorical in the least bit!

quote:

and anyone that thinks so really needs to grow the fuck up.

quote:

Originally posted by Fir3start3r You know we're there BECAUSE WE WERE ASKED TO BE THERE... Maybe you forgot this speech by Afghanistan President Hamid Karzai given at the House of Commons thanking us? http://pm.gc.ca/eng/media_gallery.a...edia_id=448#tag

Big friggin deal ...

Well, DUH, he better be thanking us! I can't imagine him saying otherwise.

I bet the Iraqi puppet leadership is very thankful too.

Yes, lets send more Canadian troops to their deaths ... but seriously, how many more years will it take to see that the Afghan situation is hopeless? Cant you guys see that Pakistan is the main factor for the growing instability in Afghanistan? Our (Canadian) duty should not be to fight someone else's war, seriously.

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton So how is a justified?

the taliban were a dispicable regime and i would have supported the invasion with or without 911, and the taliban gave refuge to an army that had declared war against the united states. that's what you get when you lie down with dogs.

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton What do you mean "so"? If they didn't know, they didn't do it. No justification to invade. HELLO?

still not caring. i really dont. the taliban are gone, they deserved to be ousted. whether they were instrumental in the attacks or not is irrelevant.

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton I never said the Taliban justice system was up to international standards. I see it completely reasonable to ask for bin Laden's extradition!

you are kidding yourself if you believe that the taliban made any serious offer to deliver bin laden. i wonder if they make these types of offers so well-to-do wet-behind-the-ears US students can then post them on forums.

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton Do you honestly think the Taliban would want to fight the United States military!?

well they did didnt they?

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton Go after Al-Qaida. FINE! Start occupying foreign countries. HELL NO!

they are there at the invitation of the afghani government. i know this must really stick in your craw but that's the way it is.

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton Never said a pipeline was the #1 reason for the invasion. Straw man argument. I said, "It has everything to do with securing a strategic position in energy supplies."

yes, and the only strategic position you have mentioned in relation to afghanistan is this illusory pipeline.

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton Fighting to restore law and order? You mean the law & order which was destroyed by NATO?

i love how you keep trying to score tiny, irrelevant points that i dont care about. yes, NATO destabilised the region. yes, i think it was a good thing. you're looking at this question from all the wrong angles. that's ok, i was a young undergraduate once too, but you'll grow out of it.

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton The only terrorists were Al-Qaida. It seems like this War on Terrorism likes to focus on regime-change instead of bringing to justice the REAL terrorists.

you dont seem to know about, or are blatantly ignoring the relationship between al qaida and the taliban. al qaida werent hanging around in afghanistan "by mistake". the taliban were in cahoots with al qaida, yes its that simple.

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton Deposed the Taliban, deposed Saddam, Osama bin Laden...alive and well 7 years after the 9/11 attacks. Fighting to restore law and order in Afghanistan. That makes me chuckle...

yeah, well we can point to thousands of allied troops fighting for "law and order" and you can't provide a single piece of evidence that they're really fighting for your imaginary pipeline.

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton Let's fight for law and order in Zimbabwe too. Oh, forgot. No oil! No strategic position like central Asia!

yeah, coz afghanistan is just brimming with natural resources

these arguments in particular really shit me. "well, you've invaded one nation, why dont you invade the other 150 that have problems?" seriously, grow up.

and for the record, i most certainly agree with a military intervention in zimbabwe.

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton Geopolitical interests. Ensuring energy supplies for the Western bloc.

really? last time i checked oil was a commodity traded on the open market, and sold to anybody and everybody. how exactly is the west guaranteeing their energy concerns in a country that has no oil, and with a pipeline that is nothing more than a line on a map currently?

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton Fictitious pipeline? No. I already gave terms to search by.

oh, so its real is it? could you tell me exactly where its built?

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton As I said, we are not here to fight other people's wars.

yes, we should just let people suffer and die under despotic rule because our tender little soldiers are more important than the lives of civilians in afghanistan.

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton Oh, and "fighting for freedom" isn't simplistic or rhetorical in the least bit!

where did i say "fighting for freedom" ?

the sooner you graduate and deal with the real world for a bit the better off we'll all be. the world really doesn't revolve around all these clandestine conspiracies you seem to be so fond of adopting.

i can't believe you favour a taliban afghanistan over the elected government that has asked the allied forces to remain. just incredible.

quote:

Originally posted by Fir3start3r What trick?? Do you really think Canadians are that dumb? Sheesh.

Canadian people arent dumb but our government unfortunatly is when it comes down to our recent policies in the middle east.

pkcRAISTLIN I'd like to know how see the current in Afghanistan.To many of us it is a big disaster and it is getting worse.It is good to have a optimistic attitude towards the situation but the reality speaks for itself.I honestly dont think things have changes that musch in that coutry since the fall of the Taliban regime,yes the people there certainly have more freedom then before,but the country still lacks basic things like security,education and economy.

The roots of the whole Taliban situation that we face today in Afghanistan goes back to Pakistan and we arent doing much about it for obvous reasons like the fact that Pakistan is one of US's allies in the region.So once again we face yet another double standard politics of the US government.

If we are actually there to fight the Islamic fundamentalism we are going to fail since we are fighting an ideology and no force or weapons can stop ideology and I think you know that as well.

PKC, once again we are bitterly divided. I'll end this debate by saying we both got our points across..

First, Pakistan needs to be taken care of. Until then the situation in Afghanistan will be fruitless, and international troops will continue dying for keeping the regime in power.

If not worse, if Musharraf loses power grip to the radicals, then imagine how that would reflect on Afghanistan.

Oh, here's that article about women that I wanted to post, but couldn't find it. There's another similar article on women's chances in running independent and successful lives in Afghanistan, but I still have to find it.

Hail to the human rights (progress) in Afghanistan! Our Canadian boys have surely made a difference!

http://www.thespec.com/article/362749

Abused Afghan women often end up in jail if they complain to police

quote:

May 01, 2008 Alisa Tang, THE ASSOCIATED PRESS The Canadian Press, 2008 JALALABAD, Afghanistan - Trafficked across the border from Pakistan with her three-year-old son, Rukhma was handed to an Afghan who raped and abused her, then beat the toddler to death as she watched helplessly. He was jailed for 20 years for murder but Rukhma ended up in prison too. Rukhma, who doesn't know her age but looks younger than 20, had put up with her mistreatment for three months last summer before seeking protection and justice from authorities. Instead, she was given a four-year sentence on Dec. 5 for adultery and "escaping her house" in Pakistan, even though she says she was kidnapped and raped. The fall of the Taliban six years ago heralded new rights for Afghan women: to go to school or get a job, and be protected under the law. Women's rights are now enshrined in the constitution. Yet except for a small urban elite, a woman fleeing domestic violence or accusing a man of rape herself often ends up the guilty party in the eyes of judges and prosecutors. "Why am I here? I'm innocent," Rukhma said, crying in a musty jail cell and cradling a baby daughter by her previous marriage whom she bore in prison. "It is cruel to have your son killed before your eyes and then to be imprisoned." In parts of Afghanistan and neighbouring Pakistan, where stern social codes prevail, a woman who runs away from home is typically suspected of having taken a lover and can be prosecuted for adultery. Simply leaving her house without her family's permission may be deemed an offence - as in Rukhma's case - although it is not classified as such under Afghanistan's penal code. The chief prosecutor of eastern Nangarhar province who oversaw Rukhma's case suggested she got off lightly. "If my wife goes to the bazaar without my permission, I will kill her. This is our culture," Abdul Qayum shouted scornfully during an interview in his office in the city of Jalalabad. His colleagues laughed approvingly. "This is Afghanistan, not America," Qayum said. The Afghan Independent Human Rights Commission registered 2,374 cases of women complaining of violence in 2007, compared with 1,651 in 2006 - a sign that more are seeking help. Family response units have been established in the police force, and there are tentative signs of sympathy in officialdom - at least in the relatively liberal capital, Kabul. At a Kabul hospital, a 16-year old girl who is too scared to give her name is recuperating from reconstructive surgery after her husband cut off her nose and ears, bashed out all but six of her teeth with a stone, and poured boiling water on her. In-laws from southern Zabul province want to take the girl home but the hospital director refuses to hand her over. "This brother-in-law comes every day. He says, 'Let me take her home. She's OK now,' " Dr. Ghairat Mal said. "I don't trust him. The Ministry of Women's Affairs brought her to us, and I won't let her go unless they take her." Kamala Janakiram, a UN human rights officer in eastern Afghanistan, said that in 70 to 80 per cent of the cases she has seen, a woman complaining of domestic violence is charged as a criminal for running away from home. The UN Office on Drugs and Crime said many rape victims are forced to marry their attackers or are jailed for adultery because proving rape is virtually impossible. Women can end up in prison simply on the basis of gossip, said Manizha Naderi, the director of Women for Afghan Women, an aid organization. "It's a horrible, horrible practice." Fear of returning to a violent spouse drives some women to suicide. Janakiram cited the case of a young village woman in Laghman province who was shot by her husband and left to die. She survived, but the provincial judge refused to hear her plea for a divorce and insisted that local elders resolve the matter. Janakiram said the woman was so scared of being forced to return to her abusive husband that on Jan. 30, she set herself ablaze in front of the Laghman court. She had burns on 98 per cent of her body and died a week later. Naderi told of a 16-year-old girl kidnapped from her engagement party by three men and raped, after which her fiance called off the engagement. "The whole village blacklisted her and said, 'It's your fault. Why did you go with them?' She was a lost soul because she was raped," Naderi said. Rather than approach police, some women seek a reconciliation through village elders or aid organizations. Orzala Ashraf, an Afghan women's rights activist, said that usually gets the woman home but can leave her vulnerable to abuse or even death at the hands of male relatives bent on saving family honour. "The woman will be more humiliated than before because she violated the family rules: You never discuss family problems outside the family circle," Ashraf said. Rukhma, who goes by only one name, is still hoping an appeals court will free her. Sitting on the prison floor with a black scarf over her hair and shoulders, she described being married in Pakistan as a preteen to an abusive man, who fathered her son, Bilal. She said she divorced him and married another Pakistani man by whom she became pregnant last year. Then, she says, a female neighbour kidnapped her and delivered her to an Afghan man named Yarul who claimed her as his wife and raped her for three months. One day she overheard Yarul finalizing a deal to sell her to another man, who wanted her but not her son. Scared of losing Bilal, she ran away one day late last summer. When Yarul found her and took her home, he beat her and the toddler relentlessly. She said the boy was placed under a blanket, barely conscious, blood dripping from his mouth. "When I lifted the blanket, he looked up and saw his mother. I could see that those were going to be his last breaths, and then he died. That was the last time we looked each other in the eyes," she said, her voice cracking, her face crumpled in grief. As she cried, so did the newborn daughter of her second marriage, lying in her lap. When police came to arrest Yarul, they arrested her, too. The prosecutor, Qayum, acknowledges that Rukhma was raped by Yarul but still maintains she shares the blame. "She spent several nights with the man," he said. "She committed adultery. It was rape, but the woman is also guilty."

This was last year's, but the updated one this year shows no signs of drug production slowing down:

http://www.thespec.com/article/240001

Afghan opium production hits record; UN blames insurgency, corruption

quote:

August 27, 2007 FISNIK ABRASHI The Canadian Press, 2007 KABUL, Afghanistan (AP) - Afghan opium poppy cultivation exploded to a record high this year, with the multibillion-dollar trade fuelled by the Taliban insurgency and corrupt officials in President Hamid Karzai's government, a UN report said Monday. Afghanistan has opium growing on 193,000 hectares of land, a 17 per cent increase from last year's then-record 165,000 hectares, according to an annual survey by the United Nations Office of Drugs and Crime. "The situation is dramatic and getting worse by the day," said Antonio Maria Costa, the UNODC's executive director. The country now accounts for 93 per cent of the global production of opium, the raw material for heroin, and has doubled its output since two years ago, the report said. "No other country in the world has ever had such a large amount of farmland used for illegal activity, beside China 100 years ago," when it was a major opium producer, Costa said in an interview in Kabul. The report did not say how much of the opium gets made into heroin in Afghanistan before being smuggled out. However, an RCMP official said earlier this month that heroin made from Afghan opium now accounts for 60 per cent of the illicit drug on Canadian streets. Karzai last year rejected U.S. offers to spray this year's crop after Afghans said the herbicide could affect livestock, crops and water supplies - fears the U.S. calls unfounded. Costa said the UN supports the government's position, but added that crop eradication was a key element of any strategy to combat its growth. Afghanistan is on track to produce 8,100 tonnes of opium this year, up 34 per cent from 6,000 tonnes in 2006, Costa said. The farm value of Afghanistan's annual crop is about US$1 billion, the UN survey said. The street value of the heroin produced from it is many times higher. While the number of poppy-free provinces in the country's north has increased from six in 2006 to 13 in 2007, production in the insurgency-hit southern provinces has exploded to unprecedented levels. In Helmand province alone, 103,000 hectares are under cultivation accounting for more than half of the national total. "The government has lost control of this territory because of the presence of the insurgents, because of the presence of the terrorists, whether Taliban or splinter al-Qaida groups," Costa said. Before it was driven from power in the U.S. invasion in 2001, the Taliban strongly curbed opium cultivation. Now it uses money from the drug trade to help finance the insurgency. "It is clearly documented now that insurgents actively promote or allow and then take advantage of the cultivation, refining and the trafficking of opium," Costa said. Taliban rebels levy a tax on farmers and also provide protection for convoys smuggling opium into neighbouring countries, Costa said. Some 3.3 million of Afghanistan's estimated 25 million people are involved in producing the opium, according to the report. Costa said there was a "tremendous amount of collusion" between traffickers and government officials. "The government's benign tolerance of corruption is undermining the future: no country has ever built prosperity on crime," Costa said in a summary of the report. Gen. Khodaidad, Afghanistan's acting counter-narcotics minister, acknowledged that the counter-narcotics strategy has failed in the country's south and west, which he blamed on bad local officials, poor policing, failure in eradication and open borders with Iran to the west and Pakistan to the east. Khodaidad, who like many Afghans goes by only one name, said the government needs to review its strategy at an upcoming national conference Wednesday. He said inefficient and corrupt local officials should be threatened with dismissal and those who curbed the production and trade should be rewarded.

This one just tops it all off. Case closed. Afghanistan is just a killing field for our Canadian troops ... spilling blood ... for nothing.

http://www.thespec.com/article/367038

Afghan corruption rampant

quote:

2008 Toronto Star KABUL (May 10, 2008) In the past 20 months, Attorney General Abdul Jabar Sabet has arrested some 300 top-echelon Afghan officials and charged them with corruption. "Ask me how many of them are in jail." How many of them are in jail? "Not one." There is the chronic malady of Afghanistan in a nutshell. Justice is a mug's game, the rule of law more useless than the paper it's written on. Not a single authority in the nation, right up into the president's office, has the clout to oppose a powerful alignment of forces that are a law unto themselves: warlords, ministers, parliamentarians, the military, police, tribal elders and wealthy entrepreneurs who are making a killing in the free-for-all of multi-billion-dollar international aid, a tsunami of cash that has made tycoons out of two-bit larcenists and filchers. "It is very frustrating," sighs Sabet. "In theory, I have the power to arrest anyone in this country if he's involved in corruption. But in practice, there are some people who are above the law, unfortunately, and I cannot bring them to justice. "I call them The Untouchables." They are in the central government, the provincial governments, the district centres, police stations, army garrisons, the banks, the aid agencies -- not a sector of Afghan society is without contamination of corruption.

quote:

NATO, including Canada, and its allies, need to make notes and learn from the Soviet experience in Afghanistan or suffer a similar defeat.

http://ago.mobile.globeandmail.com/...nlessons12.html

quote:

Canada takes notes from failed Soviet war STEVEN CHASE From Saturday's Globe and Mail Saturday, July 12 OTTAWA � The Canadian military has been studying the Soviet debacle in Afghanistan for clues on how to prevent similar mistakes as NATO tries to beat back a persistent insurgency and ready the country's weak but pro-Western government to assume greater control. It began a research project in 2006, a year in which fighting intensified for Canada in the war against the Taliban. �The project was undertaken � for the purpose of determining whether this history offered any lessons to be learned for the Canadian Forces,� an executive summary of some of the research said. The Soviets invaded Afghanistan in 1979, and pulled out combat forces in 1989 after a costly decade of fighting mujahedeen. They left behind a weak, pro-Soviet government that collapsed in 1992. By the time the Department of National Defence began its research project, Canadian soldiers had been fighting Taliban insurgents for nearly half a decade without subduing them, a 2007 Forces paper notes. �Despite many successes � the insurgency against the government of Afghanistan, the U.S. troops and [North Atlantic Treaty Organization forces] persisted.� Many of the research findings are lessons that, by 2008, the Canadian Forces, NATO soldiers and Western governments had already gleaned through experience in Afghanistan and other foreign missions. Researchers said the Afghanistan-Pakistan border is a major hindrance. The mujahedeen used the porous frontier to smuggle arms and resources into Afghanistan in the 1980s and are offering Taliban supporters the same supply route for insurgents and weapons today. �The movement of insurgents and materiel across the Afghan-Pakistan border is a paramount strategic problem,� says a 2007 memorandum by Anton Minkov and Gregory Smolynec titled 3-D Soviet Style: A Presentation on Lessons Learned from the Soviet Experience in Afghanistan. In a separate memo that year, the same authors warn that NATO forces will never be able to stabilize Afghanistan until the country's economy is sufficiently stable and growing to allow the fledging Afghan government to cover a substantial amount of its own security and welfare bills. �The main reasons behind the fall of the pro-Moscow regime in Kabul were not defeat on the battlefield nor military superiority of the resistance but the regime's failure to achieve economic sustainability and its overreliance on foreign aid,� says a document called Economic Development in Afghanistan during the Soviet Period 1979-1989: Lessons Learned from the Soviet Experience in Afghanistan. In fact, it says, the Soviets focused too much on security. �The emphasis on the security situation in Afghanistan compromised sound economic development during the period 1979-1989 � The Afghan economy continued to be overly dependent on foreign aid. The study argues that without breaking this dependency, no long-term solution to stabilize Afghanistan is possible.� The authors say Afghanistan should redevelop its petroleum wealth as part of the solution. �Revenues from the sale of natural gas were a substantial part of Afghan state income until 1986. The development of oil and natural gas industries has great potential to benefit the Afghan economy.� Other lessons Defence researchers gleaned from the Soviet period include: � �Successive battlefield victories do not guarantee strategic success.� � �Engaging and enfranchising local populations and power centres is of critical importance.� � �Building Afghan security forces is vital.� The research was conducted by the Department of National Defence's Centre for Operational Research & Analysis. The DND said it was unable to make the researchers available for comment yesterday. Canada has been sending soldiers to Afghanistan continually since 2001, and so far, 880 NATO troops have died in the fight against the Taliban, including 87 Canadians. The U.S. has recently signalled that it is �deeply troubled� by the Taliban's continued power with a recent Pentagon report saying militias have �coalesced into a resilient insurgency.� Douglas Bland, chair of Defence Management Studies at Queen's University in Kingston, said a key lesson from the 1980s is not to leave in a hurried manner as the Soviets did. �One of the big lessons for us is, don't beat a hasty uncontrolled retreat because the place then really goes nuts,� Prof. Bland said. �The exit strategy has to be some very carefully considered process and based on a strong local security situation.� He said he thinks Canadian soldiers will still be responsible for safeguarding the peace well after 2011, when Canada's troops are supposed to withdraw from combat operations in the country's southern province of Kandahar under a motion passed in Parliament. �Canadians should be prepared for the fact that Canadian soldiers and policemen and others will be employed in security duties in Afghanistan for a very long time.� He said he thinks the Forces have done other studies of the Soviet experience in Afghanistan, but said these may not be publicly available.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/serv...ry/Afghanistan/

'It's impossible to conquer the Afghans'

quote:

'It's impossible to conquer the Afghans' PAUL KORING From Saturday's Globe and Mail July 12, 2008 at 12:44 AM EDT MOSCOW � Head bowed, exhausted, the statue of a young soldier back from Afghanistan's killing fields is flanked by long, grim, lists of his dead comrades. It's a cautionary monument for Western politicians and generals who boldly boast they will succeed where the Soviets failed. In Russia, a country chock full of heroic memorials to enormous military sacrifice, the uniquely dejected pose of the helmetless Afghan combat veteran in the Ural city of Yekaterinburg is a sobering reminder that great powers have an unhappy history of overreaching and then being driven ignominiously from Afghanistan. �Canadians and Americans are learning the hard way. You have been there seven years and you have no prospect of early victory,� said Ruslan Aushev, a highly decorated combat veteran who served two tours, totalling nearly five years with the Soviet army in Afghanistan. �We knew by 1985 that we could not win,� he recalls. It then took Moscow four more years to extricate hundreds of thousands of troops from Afghanistan, while claiming victory on the way out. Afghanistan was plunged into civil war. In Russia, there's a widespread view that the U.S.-led war in Afghanistan has failed to heed the lessons of history. �You are just repeating our mistakes,� Mr. Aushev said in an elegant, memento-filled office close to the Russian Duma. While some Russians � perhaps many � take some satisfaction in watching the U.S.-led coalition struggle in Afghanistan, Mr. Aushev knows better than most the dangers of a defeated superpower leaving the wreckage of Afghanistan to violent and radicalized factions. �Most Afghans still live in a feudal society, in villages far from the cities,� he said. �For them, there is no difference between being bombed by the Soviets and now being bombed by the Americans � and it won't succeed.� In the West, the bloody, decade-long Soviet war in Afghanistan is viewed as the last gasping failure of a blundering Communist giant, eventually defeated by the proud and fierce Afghan mujahedeen, armed and backed by billions of dollars worth of sophisticated U.S. weaponry, and jihadists from throughout the Islamic world. Tagged as the Soviet's Vietnam, the Afghan quagmire helped sink the USSR. But the view from Russia � tempered by experience and the passage of two decades that allowed some lessons to sink in � suggest the West may, too, have overestimated its welcome and its capacity to rebuild Afghanistan at the point of a gun. �We could take any village, any town and drive the mujahedeen out,� Mr. Aushev said, recalling his two combat tours, first as an infantry battalion commander and later in charge of a full Soviet regiment � roughly the size of the Canadian contingent in Afghanistan. �But when we handed ground over to the Afghan army or police they would lose it in a week.� If that formula for eventual defeat sounds eerily familiar, so does much of what Mr. Aushev and other Afghan veterans recall about their efforts in Afghanistan. Mr. Aushev, 53, is no apologist for Russian military adventurism. In the post-Soviet era, he served as president of Ingushetia for eight years, and during the war in neighbouring Chechnya he decried incursions by Russian soldiers and even threatened to sue the Defence Ministry. An able soldier � the youngest to reach the four-star rank of lieutenant-general in the Russian army � Mr. Aushev now heads an international organization for veterans. And he is no stranger to dealing with extremists. He helped broker the release of more than two dozen hostages during the bloody Beslan school siege by Islamic terrorists in 2004. �The Taliban may not be able to win militarily but they can't be defeated and sooner or later the Western alliance will be forced with pullout,� he warned. Support for the insurgents will grow the longer the foreign armies remain in Afghanistan, he said. Although the Soviets deployed more than 100,000 soldiers across Afghanistan � roughly double the number of U.S. and North Atlantic Treaty Organization troops currently deployed � and trained an Afghan army three times the size of Kabul's current security forces, it was never enough, Mr. Aushev said. �If we wanted stability we would have needed 800,000 soldiers,� he said, echoing the estimates of some unheeded American generals who called for much larger occupation forces in Iraq. But no matter how many soldiers are sent (and Washington is expected to significantly increase its deployments to Afghanistan next year as the long-awaited drawdown in Iraq frees up some units), Mr. Aushev said, there can be no military solution. �There will have to be an accord with the Taliban, because at least 50 per cent of the Afghan population supports them,� he said. The Soviet Union invaded in 1979, setting off a decade-long effort to occupy and pacify Afghanistan. Former sergeant Igor Grigorevich, 46, now stands watch over a tiny, seldom-visited museum, tucked away on the ground floor of a hulking building on Moscow's outskirts. Unlike the Great Patriotic War, as Russians refer to the Second World War, there is little about the Afghan war to remember proudly. Instead there are deep scars, both on the national psyche and among hundreds of thousands of largely ignored veterans. �It's impossible to conquer the Afghans � Alexander the Great couldn't do it, the British couldn't do it, we couldn't do it and the Americans won't do it � no one can,� said Mr. Grigorevich, still trim and determined not to let the war be forgotten. The museum began largely as a volunteer effort by veterans, although the government now provides some funding. The exhibits are striking. If the Soviet army looks vaguely dated, the pictures of Afghan villagers would be instantly familiar to Canadian soldiers now serving in Afghanistan. So, too, would the lumbering four-engined military transports with honour guards solemnly carrying flag-draped coffins into the waiting holds on Kandahar air field. The Russians called those flights �Black Tulips.� But there are also poignant reminders of the brutality of a lopsided war that pits the military of a modern superpower against insurgents. Photos show bombed-out villages, a crayon drawing by a young Afghan boy depicts helicopter gunships unleashing a torrent of death and destruction. In another corner is a mock-up of a mujahedeen fighter shouldering a U.S.-made Stinger surface-to-air missile that wreaked havoc with Soviet air power and helped tip the balance to the jihadists. Russian veterans say the huge effort by the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency to arm and support the mujahedeen from bases in Pakistan was crucial to the eventual Soviet defeat. But even without the active backing of a hostile superpower, the current insurgency has new tactics and new funding that the Russians never faced. Suicide bombers and sophisticated roadside explosives were unknown to Russian occupation forces. For all the broad similarities between the Soviet efforts to pacify Afghanistan in the 1980s and the current U.S.-led campaign, there are also significant differences. U.S. and NATO troops, including Canada's, are in Afghanistan at the request of a democratically elected government headed by President Hamid Karzai. Although dismissed by critics as the �mayor of Kabul� because of his government's limited reach beyond the capital, Mr. Karzai nevertheless represents the first Afghan leader elected in a free and fair national election. There are other lessons still being learned from the Russian experience in Afghanistan. A lost war or a war that has lost public support leaves a different set of scars on its veterans, says Zurab Kekelidze, deputy director of the Serbsky psychiatric centre in Moscow. �The Afghan Syndrome,� he says, afflicts many of the thousands of Russian veterans, and, he predicts, Canadian and other Western soldiers will similarly suffer. �If a society sees a war as a good thing � then that's a form of therapy that helps,� he said at his clinic. Soldiers readjust to society after all the horrors and stresses of battle. �But if a war is unpopular or is seen as lost or pointless, then the situation is reversed and returning soldiers are forced to try and find some justification for what they have done,� he added. The Americans suffered it in Vietnam, the Soviets faced it after Afghanistan and Canadians may have to deal with the problem if the public stops backing the current war, he said.

Nice posts. Appreciate.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.